The Origin of the [Term] "Hockey Team"

William Connolley, who tends to be a little truth-challenged when it comes to matters Mc, said over at Fleck:

Incidentally, note that this “Hockey Team”stuff is a figment of McI’s.

Now I’ll admit to having some fun with this, but the term originated over at realclimate (and it wasn’t just an incidental use). I think that the first use of the term was on Jan. 27 here:

Rather, as demonstrated in IPCC(2001) [see this comparison here] and numerous additional studies since, it is what is perhaps more aptly termed the “Hockey Team”–that is, the multiple independent reconstructions and model simulations that now indicate essentially the same pattern of hemispheric mean temperature variation in past centuries, that support a “Hockey Stick” description of past temperature changes.

A few days later (and the blog had justed started), I said , having a little fun with forming lines, see the link.

Now it seems that we’re playing against an entire Hockey Team. First things first, what should the team be called: the Kyoto Flames? the IPCC Heat? the Blades? the Fever?
….
I’m a little worried about their skating skills. It looks like Mann can skate backwards, but what about Hughes? So many decisions, so little time.

A few weeks later on Feb 18, 2005, Schmidt and Ammann, used the term here:

The wider climate science context is discussed here, and the relationship to other recent reconstructions (the ‘Hockey Team’) can be seen here.

I think they should be the ‘Proxies’. Their logo can be a Log section with “pro” in small letters on on side, “ies” on the other and a big red X right over the rings. And Mann is at Penn State now, isn’t he? So they can be PSP; the Penn State Proxies.

While they’re at it, they can sell hockey pucks with a decal of the ring section pasted to it.

I was going to write something pithy, but you left me speechless, dumbfounded for a retort.

After all of the evidence that there is a Hockey Team, you act like Steve has delusions of consipracy? I don’t think there isn’t a more incestuous group of researches than the all-star hockey team. That’s not a conspiracy theory, that’s fact backed up by their own publications.

Re the “Hockey Team,” Mike did resort to the term on RC. I’m not sure if he’s the one that made it up, but in any case it was just a cute way of pointing out that numerous papers had drawn broadly similar conclusions.

Steve Bloom was trying to help the challenged Connolley. I was just trying to help a little more. Always glad to help the challenged. But so much to do, so little time.

I put Steve Bloom in the same bin as Peter: they are simply unable or unwilling to engage in substantive issues; it is all innuendo and blame, which, when you think about it, shows their terrible insecurity. It isn’t worth the time and effort to reply. It’s like arguing with a Muslim about the killing the infidels. I quit discoursing with those that just want to pick a fight.

Does this Tim Lambert have some sort of chip on his shoulder? Because the nature of his comment suggests he didn’t bother to read what he was commenting on before hitting that “Submit Comment” button.

Anyway, thanks for this post. I was under the false impression Climate Audit had invented the “Hockey Team” label. Now I can see at least some of the Real Climate guys clearly identify themselves belonging to a group of researchers all publishing “hockey stick” type results.

Any update on reviving the old Deltoid AGW threads, “Disinfo…cycle” for example? I’ve noticed you’ve made brief posts here, but you’ve posted little/no statistics, and no thermodynamics content at all.

Reminder: nearly a month ago, you mentioned of an assistant that would be returning to work on this at Deltoid — a scienceblogs employee, I presumed?